The effect of environmentally differentiated port fees to shipping companies’ environmental investments

The pressure has grown to develop cost-effective emission reduction strategies in the Baltic Sea. The forthcoming stringent regulations of the International Maritime Organization for reducing harmful emissions of shipping in the Baltic Sea are causing increasing expenses for the operators. A market-based attitude towards pricing of economic incentives could be seen as a new approach for a successful application for the additional emission reduction of nitrogen oxides (NOx). In this study the aim is to understand the phenomenon of environmentally differentiated port fees and its effects on shipping companies’ emission reduction investments. The goal is to examine empirically the real-life effects of the possible environmental differentiated port fee system and the effect of environmentally differentiated port fees on NOx reduction investments in the Baltic Sea. The research approach of this study is nomothetical. In this study research questions are answered by analyzing the broad database of the Baltic Sea fleet. Also the framework of theory is confirmed and plays an important role in analyzing the research problem. Existing investment costs of NOx emission reduction technology to ship owners are estimated and compared to investment costs with granted discounts added to the cash flows. The statistical analysis in this study is descriptive. The major statistic examination of this study is the calculation of the net present values of investments with different port fee scenarios. This is done to investigate if the NOx technology investments could be economically reasonable. Based on calculations it is clear that the effect of environmentally differentiated port fees is not adequate to compensate the total investment costs for NOx reduction. If the investment decision is made only with profitability considerations, sources will prefer to emission abatement as long as incomes from the given subsidy exceeds their abatement costs. Despite of the results, evidence was found that shipping companies are nevertheless willing to invest on voluntary emission abatement technology. In that case, investment decision could be made with criteria of, for example, sustainable strategy or brand image. Combined fairway and port fee system or governmental regulations and recommendation could also function as additional incentives to compensate the investment costs. Also, the results imply that the use of NPV is not necessarily the best method to evaluate environmental investments. If the calculations would be done with more environmental methods the results would probably be different.